Most Reproductive States
Number of births divided by Population: Census 2008
Categories:
Birth rate divided by population ... where are we having the most babies per capita?
| Rank | Region | Number of births | ÷ | Population: Census 2008 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Utah | 53,504.00 | ÷ | 2,736,424.00 | 0.02 |
| 2 | Texas | 399,603.00 | ÷ | 24,326,974.00 | 0.02 |
| 3 | Alaska | 10,996.00 | ÷ | 686,293.00 | 0.02 |
| 4 | Idaho | 24,184.00 | ÷ | 1,523,816.00 | 0.02 |
| 5 | Arizona | 102,429.00 | ÷ | 6,500,180.00 | 0.02 |
| 6 | Mississippi | 46,056.00 | ÷ | 2,938,618.00 | 0.02 |
| 7 | Nevada | 40,027.00 | ÷ | 2,600,167.00 | 0.02 |
| 8 | Georgia | 148,633.00 | ÷ | 9,685,744.00 | 0.02 |
| 9 | California | 562,440.00 | ÷ | 36,756,666.00 | 0.02 |
| 10 | New Mexico | 29,936.00 | ÷ | 1,984,356.00 | 0.02 |
| 11 | Nebraska | 26,727.00 | ÷ | 1,783,432.00 | 0.01 |
| 12 | Oklahoma | 54,016.00 | ÷ | 3,642,361.00 | 0.01 |
| 13 | South Dakota | 11,919.00 | ÷ | 804,194.00 | 0.01 |
| 14 | Hawaii | 18,982.00 | ÷ | 1,288,198.00 | 0.01 |
| 15 | Kansas | 40,968.00 | ÷ | 2,802,134.00 | 0.01 |
| 16 | Wyoming | 7,672.00 | ÷ | 532,668.00 | 0.01 |
| 17 | District of Columbia | 8,523.00 | ÷ | 591,833.00 | 0.01 |
| 18 | Louisiana | 63,376.00 | ÷ | 4,410,796.00 | 0.01 |
| 19 | Arkansas | 40,961.00 | ÷ | 2,855,390.00 | 0.01 |
| 20 | Colorado | 70,751.00 | ÷ | 4,939,456.00 | 0.01 |
| 21 | Minnesota | 73,525.00 | ÷ | 5,220,393.00 | 0.01 |
| 22 | Illinois | 180,572.00 | ÷ | 12,901,563.00 | 0.01 |
| 23 | Indiana | 88,631.00 | ÷ | 6,376,792.00 | 0.01 |
| 24 | Virginia | 107,817.00 | ÷ | 7,769,089.00 | 0.01 |
| 25 | South Carolina | 62,171.00 | ÷ | 4,479,800.00 | 0.01 |
| 26 | North Carolina | 127,859.00 | ÷ | 9,222,414.00 | 0.01 |
| 27 | Missouri | 81,385.00 | ÷ | 5,911,605.00 | 0.01 |
| 28 | Maryland | 77,494.00 | ÷ | 5,633,597.00 | 0.01 |
| 29 | Delaware | 11,989.00 | ÷ | 873,092.00 | 0.01 |
| 30 | Kentucky | 58,250.00 | ÷ | 4,269,245.00 | 0.01 |
| 31 | Tennessee | 84,355.00 | ÷ | 6,214,888.00 | 0.01 |
| 32 | Alabama | 63,232.00 | ÷ | 4,661,900.00 | 0.01 |
| 33 | Iowa | 40,607.00 | ÷ | 3,002,555.00 | 0.01 |
| 34 | North Dakota | 8,621.00 | ÷ | 641,481.00 | 0.01 |
| 35 | Washington | 86,876.00 | ÷ | 6,549,224.00 | 0.01 |
| 36 | New Jersey | 115,020.00 | ÷ | 8,682,661.00 | 0.01 |
| 37 | Ohio | 150,593.00 | ÷ | 11,485,910.00 | 0.01 |
| 38 | Montana | 12,508.00 | ÷ | 967,440.00 | 0.01 |
| 39 | Florida | 236,802.00 | ÷ | 18,328,340.00 | 0.01 |
| 40 | Wisconsin | 72,340.00 | ÷ | 5,627,967.00 | 0.01 |
| 41 | Oregon | 48,689.00 | ÷ | 3,790,060.00 | 0.01 |
| 42 | New York | 250,104.00 | ÷ | 19,490,297.00 | 0.01 |
| 43 | Michigan | 127,483.00 | ÷ | 10,003,422.00 | 0.01 |
| 44 | Pennsylvania | 149,090.00 | ÷ | 12,448,279.00 | 0.01 |
| 45 | Massachusetts | 77,676.00 | ÷ | 6,497,967.00 | 0.01 |
| 46 | Connecticut | 41,820.00 | ÷ | 3,501,252.00 | 0.01 |
| 47 | Rhode Island | 12,372.00 | ÷ | 1,050,788.00 | 0.01 |
| 48 | West Virginia | 20,931.00 | ÷ | 1,814,468.00 | 0.01 |
| 49 | New Hampshire | 14,378.00 | ÷ | 1,315,809.00 | 0.01 |
| 50 | Maine | 14,151.00 | ÷ | 1,316,456.00 | 0.01 |
| 51 | Vermont | 6,511.00 | ÷ | 621,270.00 | 0.01 |
Ready? 1,570 Mashups and counting!
Create a Mashup
Not registered? It's cool.
Register Here
Not enough data? Suggest some more!
Suggest a Data Set
Need something more statistically rigorous?
Analyze This!
Related Mashups
Number of births
divided by
State Land Area (square miles)
tommycutter
17 weeks 3 days ago
State Energy Expenditures
divided by
Population: Census 2008
mark lessans
17 weeks 4 days ago
Refugee Arrivals 2008
divided by
Population: Census 2008
dwhite012
6 weeks 5 days ago
CO2 Emissions from Fossil Fuel Combustion - Metric Tons CO2
divided by
Population: Census 2008
chaff
16 weeks 3 days ago
% of population without health insurance
times
Population: Census 2008
barbobxl
19 weeks 9 hours ago
- 1 of 32
- ››
Comments
It'd be nice to have more significant digits (out to four or five at least) in the "Result" column.
Utah is ranked #1. Is that because there are 3 wives having babies for each husband?
No, Utah just has the lowest median age. Lots of older folks in Vermont and Maine means lower reproductive rates in those states.
West Virginia is last...is that because:
1) Everyone is related-->cannot carry babies to term
2) The "Mountain Milk" is suppressing their plumbing?
West Virginia isn't last, it's 48th. Maine is 50th; Vermont is 51st......I don't know how that happened since there are only 50 states. Those states are last or near last because the young people leave the state before marrying and the Mexicans haven't made it that far north yet.
Okay, now I see why Vermont is 51st.....they included the District of Criminals (DC) in the stats.
Explanation right here:
http://www.datamasher.org/data-sets/median-age-census-2008#map-tab
Utah has the youngest median age, followed by Texas and Alaska.
Maine has the oldest median age, followed by Vermont, WV and NH.
The south states are more reproductiv ethan the north ones. Is it becuase life insurance quotes are lower there?
Post new comment